Terrorism in India

Now I know a number of posters have mentioned in other threads that they see no difference between the dangers in Pakistan and India. However, I always saw the situation a little differently. In light of todays events, I thought Id research the dangers more closely than I have done before for my own education.

Ignoring the most recent, by my count there have been 128 terrorist acts in India that involved a minimum of one death since the begining of 2006.

That is roughly 1 a week. I know its a big country, but that shocked me.

By comparisson there were 105 in Pakistan for the same period (though given population size differences the number for Pakistan is far larger).

(There is a small chance of reports being duplicated in the source evidence)

In comparison, the UK has had 0 and the USA has had 1 (an incident Im suprised Id never heard of)

"One woman was killed and five other injured when Naveed Afzal Haq, a Muslim-American man, opened fire on the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle building in downtown Seattle. Haq entered the building, expressed his anger toward Israel and the US war in Iraq, and began shooting. Haq allegedly told police that it was a hostage situation and wanted the US to get weapons out of Israel. Haq eventually surrendered to police and was taken into custody. He now faces either life in prison or execution."

Anyway, I still (from my remote perspective) see Pakistan as far more dangerous and lawless but how do others see Indian security evolving over the forseeable future?

It isnt an issue that I pretend to know much about, so what are the politics of terrorism in India and its future?

Last edited by Goughy; 27-11-2008 at 05:29 AM.

If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there will be edits

Now I know a number of posters have mentioned in other threads that they see no difference between the dangers in Pakistan and India. However, I always saw the situation a little differently. In light of todays events, I thought Id research the dangers more closely than I have done before for my own education.

Ignoring the most recent, by my count there have been 128 terrorist acts in India that involved a minimum of one death since the begining of 2006.

That is roughly 1 a week. I know its a big country, but that shocked me.

By comparisson there were 105 in Pakistan for the same period (though given population size differences the number for Pakistan is far larger).

(There is a small chance of reports being duplicated in the source evidence)

In comparison, the UK has had 0 and the USA has had 1 (an incident Im suprised Id never heard of)

"One woman was killed and five other injured when Naveed Afzal Haq, a Muslim-American man, opened fire on the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle building in downtown Seattle. Haq entered the building, expressed his anger toward Israel and the US war in Iraq, and began shooting. Haq allegedly told police that it was a hostage situation and wanted the US to get weapons out of Israel. Haq eventually surrendered to police and was taken into custody. He now faces either life in prison or execution."

Anyway, I still (from my remote perspective) see Pakistan as far more dangerous and lawless but how do others see Indian security evolving over the forseeable future?

It isnt an issue that I pretend to know much about, so what are the politics of terrorism in India and its future?

Though I am not denying that Pak can be dangerous at these times but most of our attacks are concentrated in the Waziristan reigon which is where US led WoT is going on, while attacks in India seems to be more widely distrubuted hence there could be more unpredictibility attached to it.

In Pak if you can avoid the Frontier reigon along with say a major city like Islamabad then you are relativley safe but same cannot be said about India I feel.

News priority means a story is more important when it becomes more personal, therefore Western world disasters are dealt with more prominently in Western world countries than something happening elsewhere. And when that does happen they relate to it through the means of Westerners.

"One woman was killed and five other injured when Naveed Afzal Haq, a Muslim-American man, opened fire on the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle building in downtown Seattle. Haq entered the building, expressed his anger toward Israel and the US war in Iraq, and began shooting. Haq allegedly told police that it was a hostage situation and wanted the US to get weapons out of Israel. Haq eventually surrendered to police and was taken into custody. He now faces either life in prison or execution."

Seems to fit the profile of school shooting more than an act of terrorism.

(Not that a school shooting can't be defined as terrorism, of course, but then the US has had more than one)

A follower of the schools of Machiavelli, Bentham, Locke, Hobbes, Sutcliffe, Bradman, Lindwall, Miller, Hassett and Benaud
Member of ESAS, JMAS, DMAS, FRAS and RTDAS